netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [6/6]: jenkins hash for neigh

To: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [6/6]: jenkins hash for neigh
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:14:03 -0700
Cc: laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E1CBu70-00010X-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040925005623.2faf8faf.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <E1CBu70-00010X-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 21:56:10 +1000
Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > 4) The controversial/RFC patch, dorking with neigh_forced_gc()
> >
> > +                   if (n->nud_state -= NUD_INCOMPLETE &&
> > +                       reap_incomplete == 0 &&
> > +                       time_after(jiffies,
> > +                                  n->used + n->parms->retrans_time)) {
> > +                           num_incomplete++;
> > +                           goto next_ent;
> 
> That should either be time_before, or you need to swap the arguments.

Good catch, and it means that the code basically behaved
as if the NUD_INCOMPLETE tests weren't even there.

So, as mentioned in another email, this is what I'm using
in the end:

# This is a BitKeeper generated diff -Nru style patch.
#
# ChangeSet
#   2004/09/27 11:46:12-07:00 davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
#   [NET]: Remove INCOMPLETE checks from neigh_forced_gc().
#   
#   Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
# 
# net/core/neighbour.c
#   2004/09/27 11:45:40-07:00 davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +3 -11
#   [NET]: Remove INCOMPLETE checks from neigh_forced_gc().
# 
diff -Nru a/net/core/neighbour.c b/net/core/neighbour.c
--- a/net/core/neighbour.c      2004-09-27 11:55:57 -07:00
+++ b/net/core/neighbour.c      2004-09-27 11:55:57 -07:00
@@ -123,20 +123,12 @@
                np = &tbl->hash_buckets[i];
                while ((n = *np) != NULL) {
                        /* Neighbour record may be discarded if:
-                          - nobody refers to it.
-                          - it is not permanent
-                          - (NEW and probably wrong)
-                            INCOMPLETE entries are kept at least for
-                            n->parms->retrans_time, otherwise we could
-                            flood network with resolution requests.
-                            It is not clear, what is better table overflow
-                            or flooding.
+                        * - nobody refers to it.
+                        * - it is not permanent
                         */
                        write_lock(&n->lock);
                        if (atomic_read(&n->refcnt) == 1 &&
-                           !(n->nud_state & NUD_PERMANENT) &&
-                           (n->nud_state != NUD_INCOMPLETE ||
-                            time_after(jiffies, n->used + 
n->parms->retrans_time))) {
+                           !(n->nud_state & NUD_PERMANENT)) {
                                *np     = n->next;
                                n->dead = 1;
                                shrunk  = 1;

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>